Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm running the first gen print of Slifer. Before I get asked about it, no I don't do tourneys or follow the modern card rulings. I stopped playing yu-gi-oh back in 2007 so I use the same limited rules that we had back then. I don't think we had any banned cards back in 2007. I could be wrong.

Anyway, that being said, I usually only play against a friend of mine. We both decided to start playing again about a month ago. I'm running a dragon deck (yes, using all of the cards specially including the newer ones as you can tell by my use of Red-Eyes Darkness) and I came across this dilemma. Am I allowed to summon Slifer using Red-Eyes' effect?

Furthermore, upon re-reading Slifer's effect it states that it is also treated as a dragon. My question is, does this only become true when it's on the field? Would the graveyard count as well?

Have you got a link to the version of the card that states that Slifer is treated as a Dragon? All the Slifers I can locate so far appear to be of the Divine-Beast type, without mention of also being treated as a Dragon...
–
thesunneversetsDec 19 '12 at 12:50

@thesunneversets here you go :) Original Slifer you'll find it about halfway down the page.
–
CeelosDec 19 '12 at 13:07

2 Answers
2

Okay, I think I've worked out what's going on here. The link to Original Slifer that you kindly provided for me shows the original, illegal version of the card. There is a second link, from that page, to the legal Slifer version. You will see that the second Slifer does not have any ruling declaring the card to be of Dragon Type.

Why does the illegal Slifer have a ruling indicating that it is a dragon? Well, it took a little bit of detective work but I quote from that page:

This card's written lore in the anime and manga was never shown fully
or directly; the lore listed here is a reconstruction based on how it
was used and may not be accurate or complete.

What is this talking about? Well, at some point in the anime an interaction between Slifer and other "cards" occurred that would not have been able to happen if Slifer had not been of Dragon type (I believe I actually found what this was earlier today, but have lost it again: I'll edit it in if I track it down). Seemingly, then, in the anime at least Slifer is of "Divine-Dragon" type.

In tournaments I would guess that Slifer is categorically only a Divine-Beast, and not a dragon, and does not combo with Red-Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon. You say you're not especially interested in tournament restrictions and the latest rulings though - so if you wanted to make a house rule that yes, of course "Slifer the Sky Dragon" is a dragon, then there's nothing stopping you. That interpretation was good enough for the anime so there's no reason it shouldn't be good enough for you. If you go down that route I would treat Slifer as having "Divine-Dragon" on its type line for all purposes, so it would still be a Dragon in the graveyard too. Hope that helps!

Regardless of thesunneversets observations that a legal version of the card doesn't contain the Original versions "treat this as a Dragon-Type Monster", that shouldn't matter in this situation. The rule book splits Effect Monsters into five categories, one of which is Continuous Effect:

This effect is active while the Effect Monster Card is face-up on the field. The effect starts when the face-up monster appears on the field, and ends once that monster is gone or is no longer faceup; there is no trigger for its activation. These monsters are most useful if you have a strategy to protect them while they are on the field.

The rules text doesn't apply. The card type still applies in the graveyard. Otherwise it's pretty meaningless that Red-Eyes states that "you can summon a Dragon-type monster from your Graveyard", if there's no such thing as Dragon-type monsters once the cards are in the Graveyard.
–
thesunneversetsDec 19 '12 at 23:06

1

Though yeah, I guess I agree with you that a card with "treat this as a Dragon-Type Monster" in the rules text would be problematic. Does such a card exist? I've still only seen rulings that Slifer counts as a Dragon, rather than card text saying so, though I'm prepared to believe there are a bewildering number of different printings of this card :)
–
thesunneversetsDec 19 '12 at 23:10

1

A Google image search found me an example copy with the text.
–
user1873Dec 20 '12 at 2:22

If you've found the text on a specific card, you should link it from your answer.
–
ire_and_curses♦Dec 20 '12 at 19:45